A field experiment was conducted at at Regional Agricultural Research Station, Maruteru, West Godavari district, Andhra Pradesh during Rabi,2014- 15 and 2015-16 to find out integrated nutrient management effect on maize with ten treatments i.e. T1 (Control), T2 (100% RDF), T3 (100% RDF + 25% RDF through FYM and vermicompost), T4 Soil Test Based Fertilizer Recommendation, T5 (125% RDF), T6 (150 % RDF), T7 Farmers Practice in RBD with 3 replications.
Trang 1Original Research Article https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.810.248
Effect of Different Levels of Fertilizer Application along with Organic
Manure on Maize Yield and Soil Fertility
A Sireesha*, Ch Sreenivas, T Usharani and P V Satyanarayana
Regional Agricultural Research Station, Maruteru, Andhra Pradesh, India
*Corresponding author
A B S T R A C T
Introduction
Maize (Zea mays L.) is one of the important
cereal crop after wheat and rice in the world
In India, it ranks third after rice and wheat
Maize is being consumed as food by human
being, fodder by animals and also required by
the various industries The predominant maize
growing states that contribute more than 80%
of total maize production are Andhra Pradesh
(20.9%), Uttar Pradesh (6.1%), and Madhya
Pradesh (5.7%) Himachal Pradesh (4.4%) apart from these states maize is also grown Jammu and Kashmir and northern states (www Farmers.gov.in) Andhra Pradesh is the non-traditional maize growing state but, the climate of the state is very favourable for the maize crop and hence maize can be grown in any season in the state Moreover, winter maize is more assured crop with higher productivity potential compared to monsoon season Therefore, areas where winter rice
International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences
ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 8 Number 10 (2019)
Journal homepage: http://www.ijcmas.com
A field experiment was conducted at at Regional Agricultural Research
Station, Maruteru, West Godavari district, Andhra Pradesh during
Rabi,2014-15 and 20Rabi,2014-15-16 to find out integrated nutrient management effect on maize
with ten treatments i.e T1 (Control), T2 (100% RDF), T3 (100% RDF + 25%
RDF through FYM and vermicompost), T4 Soil Test Based Fertilizer Recommendation, T5 (125% RDF), T6 (150 % RDF), T7 Farmers Practice in RBD with 3 replications Maize variety Kaveri Corn-50 was taken for study The results revealed that the grain yield of maize respond significantly with the different treatment combination The result showed highest grain yield (85.52
100% Recommended Dose of Fertilizers along with organics The organic carbon content of the soil and available nutrient status of soil was found to be high in integrated nutrient management treatments and nutrient uptake in grain and stalk was also found to be high with the treatment receiving 150% recommended dose of fertilizers
K e y w o r d s
INM, Maize, Yield,
Soil fertility and
Nutrient Uptake
Accepted:
15 September 2019
Available Online:
10 October 2019
Article Info
Trang 2crop suffers due to water scarcity, the maize
has emerged as potential alternative like,
Guntur, Krishna, and west Godavari districts
This shift is due to no-till maize in rice-maize
system and cultivation of Single Cross
winter season have an attainable grain yield of
10 to 12 t/ha Such biomass generation can
often be associated with removal of 200 kg N,
30 kg P, 167 kg K, and 42 kg S per hectare
Continuous production of high yielding maize
will lead to the rapid depletion of mineral
nutrients from soil because of the greater
nutrient uptake and removal by maize The
present farming system totally depends on use
of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and growth
regulators for enhancing crop production But
deterioration in soil health associated with
escalation in the prices of chemical fertilizers
and environmental hazards due to excessive
use of fertilizers, lead to emphasize on
supplementation or substitution of chemical
fertilizers with low priced nutrient sources
such as organic and bio sources Application
of these nutrient sources alone or in
combination with inorganic sources had been
found beneficial not only in enhancing the
productivity of maize and wheat but also had
the beneficial impact on soil properties
Hence, the present experiment was conducted
to find out the effect of integrated nutrient
management and the levels of fertilizer
application on yield attributes, yield and
nutrient uptake of maize
Materials and Methods
A field experiment was conducted at Regional
Agricultural Research Station, Maruteru, West
Godavari district, Andhra Pradesh during
Rabi,14-15 and 15-16 seasons with seven
treatments i.e., Control, Recommended Dose
of Fertilizers (120-32-32 NPK/acre),
Integrated Nutrient Management (100% RDF
+ 25% RDF organic through FYM and
vermicompost), Soil Test Based Fertilizer
Recommendations (160-22-32 KPK/acre), 125% Recommended dose of fertilizers, 150% Recommended dose of fertilizers and Farmers practice (200-60-40 NPK/acre) with three replications Maize hybrid (Kaveri Corn-50) was sown was sown in lines in a unit plot size
of 8.0 m x 4.0 m with a spacing of 60 cm x 20cm Application of farm yard manure was done before sowing of the maize crop in the given treatment Urea as Nitrogen source was applied in three splits as Basal, at knee high and flowering stage Single Super Phosphate,
a phosphorus source was applied completely
as basal; Muriate of potash, a potassium source was applied in two splits as basal and
at flowering stage
Observations on yield and yield parameters was done by selecting plants randomly in each net plot and were tagged with a level for recording various observations on growth and yield parameters Biometric observation: Biometric observation such as plant population, average plant height at maturity, number of cobs, length of cobs, test weight of
1000 grain, cob girth, number of grain, number of row were recorded treatment wise grain and stalk yields were recorded per plot and converted into quintal ha-1 For recording yield data two border rows from each side as border were first removed from the field to avoid error The crop in net plot was harvested for calculation on yield data
Soil analysis pH:- pH of the soil determined
by using soil water suspension (1:2.5) with the help of digital pH meter EC: - EC also determined using soil water suspension (1:2.5) with help of conductivity meter (Jackson, 1967) Organic carbon: Organic Carbon was determined by Walkley and Black‟s rapid titration method as described by Jackson (1967) Available Nitrogen: It was determined
by Alkaline Potassium Permagnate Method described by Subbiah and Asija (1956) Available Phosphorus: It is determined by
Trang 3Olsen’s method using 0.5 M NaHCO3 (Olsen
et al., 1954) Available Potassium:- Potassium
is determined by using Neutral Normal
Ammonium Acetate (pH 7.0) by Flame
Photometer Nitrogen in plant sample was
determined by micro Kjeldahl method Other
nutrients like P, K, Ca, Mg, S and
micronutrients were determined by using
diacid digestion of plant sample and respective
uptakes were calculated (Piper, 1966)
Initial Soil Analysis: The soils of the
experimental field was clay loam having low
available nitrogen (136.5 kg/ha), phosphorus
(92.0 kg/ha) and potassium (268.5 kg/ha) pH
and Electrical Conductivity of soil was 7.09
and 0.18 dS/m respectively Organic carbon
content of initial soil sample was 0.92%
Results and Discussion
Yield parameters
The Cob length, No of grains per cob and test
weight (100 kernels) among all treatments
control treatment showed low as compared to
all other treatments Application of 150% and
125% recommended dose of fertilizers
showed highest number of grains per cob This
indicates that the nutrient application resulted
in augmented photosynthetic activity due to
combined and balance effect of nutrients in
maize Increase in yield attributing parameters
within 125% RDF and 150% RDF were noted
in general significant This might be attributed
to increase in cell expansion and various
metabolic processes in the presence of
adequate available nutrient Similar results
were in accordance with the Kumar et al.,
(2017) revealed that treatment T3 (150%
RDF) recorded significantly higher growth
parameters and yield attributes viz plant
height (201.90 cm), number of grains cob-1
(393.20), test weight (223.25 g) and grain
yield (52.05 q ha ha-1) which was closely
followed by treatment T5 (RDF+5 tons FYM
ha–1 and recorded plant height (200.30 cm), number of grains cob-1 (391.95), test weight (223.15 g) and grain yield (51.70 q ha ha-1) and was found to be at par to treatment T3
However, Mehta et al., (2005) also reported
significant increase in cobs plant-1 of maize with application of 100 % RDF along with FYM at 10 t ha-1 over control
However, treatment receiving Organic fertilizers along with chemical fertilizers also resulted in cob length, no of grains per cob and 100 kernal weight This might be due to the reason that, Organics besides release their own nutrient might have increased the nutrient use efficiency of applied inorganic fertilizer in maize crop The result of the present study is
in agreement with those of several
investigators Sujatha et al., (2008) and Kumar
et al., (2017)
Soil parameters
Regarding the soil pH and Electrical Conductivity no significant variation was observed Variation in Soil organic carbon content among the different treatments was also not significant, however, treatment receiving Organics through farm yard manure resulted in highest organic carbon content in soil compared to all other treatments Owing
to the nature and the pattern of mineralization combined use of organic manures improved the physico chemical properties of the soil rather than application of chemical fertilizers Similar results were also reported by Manickam (1993), Swarup Anand (1991) and Ramesh (1998)
Soil available nutrient status was also found to
be low in case of control treatment as compared to that of all other treatments There was no significant difference in soil available nutrient status among the levels of chemical fertilizers and treatment receiving chemical and organic fertilizers
Trang 4Table.1 Effect of levels of fertilizers application on yield attributes and yield of maize
2 Recommended Dose of
Fertilizers
255 261 258 27.2 29.2 28.2 255 261 258 27.2 29.2 28.2 70.0 80.5 75.3
3 Soil Test Based Fertilizer
Recommendation
267 245 256 25.1 28.4 26.7 267 245 256 25.1 28.4 26.7 72.3 69.7 71.0
4 Integrated nutrient
management
285 312 299 27.1 27.4 27.3 285 312 299 27.1 27.4 27.3 71.6 80.1 75.9
Trang 5Table.2 Effect of levels of fertilizers application on soil physico chemical properties
S.
No
2 Recommended Dose of
Fertilizers
6.24 6.46 6.35 0.68 0.74 0.71 0.95 0.98 0.96
3 Soil Test Based
Fertilizer
Recommendation
6.06 6.24 6.15 0.62 0.64 0.63 1.00 1.04 1.02
4 Integrated nutrient
management
6.21 6.29 6.25 0.63 0.53 0.58 1.04 1.04 1.04
7 Farmers practice 6.37 6.42 6.39 0.53 0.52 0.52 0.92 0.89 0.90
Mean 6.21 6.32 6.26 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.96 0.96 0.96
Table.3 Effect of levels of fertilizers application on soil nutrient available status
(Kg/ha)
Available Phosphorus
(kg/ha)
Available Potassium
(kg/ha)
1 control 88.5 83.1 85.8 59.2 58.9 59.05 177.5 165.7 171.6
2 Recommended
Dose of
Fertilizers
115.7 109.9 112.8 81.6 69.4 75.5 203.6 223.9 213.75
3 Soil Test Based
Fertilizer
Recommendation
101.3 96.2 98.75 69.1 58.7 63.9 241.4 249.0 245.2
4 Integrated
nutrient
management
121.0 134.8 127.9 80.7 78.6 74.65 251.7 278.2 264.95
5 125% RDF 113.7 108.0 110.85 77.4 65.8 71.6 217.5 227.2 222.35
6 150% RDF 108.5 103.1 105.8 80.4 68.4 74.4 229 225.7 227.35
7 Farmers practice 105.4 100.1 102.75 80.1 68.1 74.1 215.1 236.5 225.8
Mean 107.73 101.3 104.51 75.5 65.4 70.45 219.4 269.5 244.45
Trang 6Table.4 Effect of levels of fertilizers on nutrient uptake of maize
(Kg/ha)
Phosphorus Uptake (kg/ha)
Potassium Uptake (kg/ha)
1 control 45.3 39.6 42.5 11.1 11.4 30.0 21.9 20.7 27.8
Dose of Fertilizers
132.7 121.4 127.1 20.4 18.6 84.0 85.6 78.8 83.6
3 Soil Test Based
Fertilizer
Recommendation
133.3 124.4 128.9 20.8 17.0 84.9 84.8 78.2 84.0
4 Integrated nutrient
management
139.0 133.5 136.3 24.4 15.1 89.7 92.8 86.6 89.7
5 125% RDF 132.3 121.1 126.7 20.2 19.5 84.0 83.6 87.2 84.3
6 150% RDF 142.5 134.4 138.5 20.3 14.0 89.9 94.7 88.1 90.3
7 Farmers practice 129.1 120.3 124.7 18.2 19.1 82.3 83.6 77.2 81.8
Fig.1
Trang 7Fig.2
However, soil available nutrient status in
treatments receiving nutrients through only
chemical fertilizers also indicated slight
decrease in available nutrient status, but
significant trend was not observed among the
treatments receiving nutrients through only
chemical fertilizers
Treatment with Integrated nutrient
management practice maintained soil available
nutrient status for two seasons Similar results
were also reported by Lalith Kannan et al.,
2013 and Priyavarath Mishra et al., 2019
Plant nutrient uptake
Plant nutrient uptake was also found to low in
case of control plot However, plant nutrient
uptake was high with chemical fertilizers and
it was increased with the increase in level of
fertilizer application It might be due to the
increase in dry weight or yield of maize, nutrient uptake also increased There was not much significant increase in nutrient uptake was not observed among the chemical treatments and treatment receiving organic fertilizers However, the nutrient uptake followed the same trend as that of maize yield The results obtained from the field experiments conducted to study effect of integrated nutrient management and the levels
of fertilizer application on yield attributes, yield and nutrient uptake of maize revealed that, application of recommended dose of inorganic fertilizer along with FYM and vermicompost to maize not only enhanced productivity of maize over the control and recommended N, P and K respectively, but also improved soil fertility in terms of higher available N, P, K and organic carbon
Trang 8References
Kumar Rakesh, Kumawat Narendra, Kumar
Sudhir, Singh Amitesh Kumar and
Bohra J.S (2017) Effects of NPKS
and Zn Fertilization on, Growth, Yield
and Quality of Baby corn- A Review
International Journal of Current
Microbiology and applied Sciences 6
(3): 1422-1428
Lalith Kannan, M Dhivya, D Abinaya, R
Lekshmi Krishna and S Krishnakumar
2013 Effect of Integrated Nutrient
Management on soil fertility and
productivity in maize Bulletin of
Environmental pharmacology and Life
Sciences Vol 2(8): 61-67
Manickam, T.S (1993) Organics in soil
fertility and productivity management
In: organics in soil health and crop
production Oryza, 30: 54-59
Mehta, Y.K., Shaktawat, M.S., and Singhi,
S.M (2005) Influence of sulphur,
phosphorus and farmyard manure on
yield on yield at tributes and yield of
maize (Zea mays) in southern
Rajasthan condition Indian Journal of
Agronomy 50:203205
Priyavart Mishra, U.S Tiwari, Hanuman
Prasad Pandey, R.K Pathak and A.K
Sachan 2019 Impact of INM on
Growth and Yield of Maize (Zea mays)
Crop in Central Plain Zone of Uttar
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci 8(04): 138-150
Piper, C.S (1966) Soil and plant analysis
Hans publications, Bombay 5 Jackson, M.L (1967) Soil Chemical analysis Prentice Hall of India, Pvt Ltd., New Delhi: 498
Ramesh, S (1998) Substitution of inorganic
N through poultry manure and livestock wastes in low land rice M.Sc (Ag) thesis submitted to TNAU, Coimbatore
Subbiah, B.V and C.L Asija (1956) A rapid
procedure for estimation of available nitrogen in soils Curr Sci., 25:
259-260
Jackson, M.L (1973) Soil Chemical Analysis,
Prentice Hall of India (Pvt.) Ltd., New Delhi
Sujatha, M.G., Lingaraju, B.S., Palled, Y.B
and Ashalatha, K.V (2008) Importance of integrated nutrient management practices in maize under rainfed condition Karnataka Journal of Agricultural sciences 21: 334-338 Swarup Anand (1991) Long term effect of
green manuring (Sesbania aculeata) on
soil properties and sustainability of rice and wheat yield on a sodic soil J Indian Soc Soil Sci., 28: 336-370 Walkley, A and C.A Black (1934) An
estimation of methods for determining organic carbon and nitrogen in the soils J Agric Sci., 25: 598-609
How to cite this article:
Sireesha, A., Ch Sreenivas, T Usharani and Satyanarayana, P V 2019 Effect of Different Levels of Fertilizer Application along with Organic Manure on Maize Yield and Soil Fertility
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci 8(10): 2137-2144 doi: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.810.248